I feel like the in game graphics for Halo Reach are much better than Halo 4's in game graphics, anyone else?
-
I liked reaches art style but it wouldn't have worked in halo 4 because halo reaches art style was very dark giving a feel to the atmosphere that reach is falling and the Covanant is winning
-
I think halo 4 looks better from far away (as in looking at a tree from long distance) but reach had better details. In reach the trees, grass, water, rocks look better up, in halo 4 you can easily see the copy paste nature of textures on certain objects.
-
It's Reach all the way for me, I enjoyed the art more in Reach, the buildings looked ace! Halo 4 I feel was rushed, armour colours looks too glossy & you got too much glare. The sound was really tinny too. FOR REACH!!! ;)
-
I agree, but Halo 4 technically had better graphics. But it was hard to look at and it seemed unnatural. Halo: Reach's styling was far superior. Plus it allowed for larger maps such as forge world. But Reach was just a better game all around in my opinion.
-
I think it's the lighting, 4 is way too bright.
-
Halo Reach has better graphics, halo 4 has better lighting.
-
Halo 4 has better graphics but the artistic style Halo Reach is better. IMO
-
Edited by Toa Axis: 9/28/2013 2:53:19 AMEDIT: already posted here, whoops.
-
[quote]yes and no because some people says yes and some people say no I say yes[/quote]
-
Reach just won o.o
-
I think the combination of art style and graphics can determine how appealing a game is. Halo 3 has one of the best combinations in my opinion, and Reach is close in second. Halo 4 may have great graphics, but the art style takes away from that and makes it look not as well done as its predecessors.
-
Halo 4's graphics were way better but reach + 4 had completely different art styles.
-
Your thinking of art design. Halo 4 looked better, but some people like reaches art design more
-
In some areas, yes. Reach had tesselated water, a greater lod for grass, and AO.
-
No, Halo 4 definitely had better graphics. What your thinking of is the art style, which in my opinion was much better in Reach.
-
change graphics to everything
-
Halo 4, Reach was just brown and grey
-
Halo 4, for all it's problems, has better graphics in terms of resolution, detailed textures (with a few exceptions), so on and so forth... But the art direction was gods awful; Spartans in metal bathing suits, rejected Doom creatures joining the Covenant, and the Promethean creatures looking like people and animals in bad kaiju creature costumes from the 70s, and shrunken down.
-
Halo 4's are unquestionably better, but I like Reach's art style better. The former is too bright for my liking.
-
Halo 4 is like battlefield LLLLLEEEEEENNNNNSSSSSS FLLLLLLLAAAAAAARRRRRREEEEEEEE
-
no. no way. No Freaking Way.
-
No, Halo 4's graphics are noticeably better. However because Halo 4 is pushing the 360 right to the limits of what it can do texture rendering issues and such are more noticeable. As is that 343 had to use more technical trickery, such as Lens Flare, to achieve these graphics.
-
Halo Reach had much much much better vistas and skyboxes than Halo 4 had. Halo 4 tried to compensate their shitty distances with lens flare or other methods. Also Halo Reach had much better character models when it comes to armor. Halo 4 obviously had better facial expressions and interiors, no question about it. It's pretty hard to choose for me. Halo 4 interiors and Forerunner architecture were absolutely stunning, while Reach's skyboxes were the best I'd ever seen.
-
I agree. Halo 4 is just too shiny and has too much lens flare.
-
Halo 4 had juicer colors and seemed more natural and beautiful. So no.. Reach had very boring coloring scheme.
-
I found thigs to be more aesthetically pleasing in Reach.